Pakistani and US officials banded together today to present a united face against revelations in the WikiLeaks cables that portray a fragile relationship dogged by subterfuge, mutual suspicion and money wrangles.

The US ambassador, Cameron Munter, paid a visit to the Pakistani prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, at his hilltop residence in Islamabad, where the men downplayed the significance of the leaked diplomatic dispatches.

Gilani said Pakistan's national interests "would not be compromised by such mischief in any manner". At a bridge opening ceremony earlier in the day, Munter said: "Working together, we will get past the WikiLeaks problems."

Local television stations latched on to a revelation that Gilani had quietly approved of the US drone strikes against militant hideouts in the tribal areas, in contradiction of official policy.

"I don't care if they do it as long as they get the right people. We'll protest in the national assembly and then ignore it," Gilani reportedly said in August 2008, shortly after becoming prime minister.

Local media also highlighted colourful criticism in the cables of President Asif Ali Zardari – described as a "numbskull" by the British Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup – and reports that the US helped ease the former president Pervez Musharraf from office by insisting he was granted immunity from prosecution.

But television stations assiduously avoided the more explosive claims, which focus on the role of Pakistan's powerful army: fears over the safety of the nuclear arsenal, allegations that the army is covertly supporting the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, and reports that army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani, threatened to oust Zardari at the height of a political crisis last year.

Prompted by warnings from US diplomats and Hillary Clinton last week, the army launched a pre-emptive strike against the WikiLeaks documents before they were made public. On Monday a senior general briefed Pakistani journalists, saying that Pakistan had "transited from the 'most sanctioned ally' of the US to the 'most bullied ally'."

According to Dawn newspaper the general complained of a "transactional relationship" between Pakistan and the US, echoing language used in the cables by the US vice-president, Joe Biden. "The real aim of US strategy is to de-nuclearise Pakistan," he reportedly said.

In the cables, the former ambassador Anne Patterson reported that "no amount of money" would stop Pakistan's military from supporting Islamist groups it viewed as a buffer against India; these included Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Afghan Taliban.

Senior officials predicted such comments would hurt Islamabad's ties with the outside world. "You have built them over the years and all of a sudden something gets out. It's top secret; it's classified; it harms the relationship," the diplomat Wajid Shamsul Hasan told the BBC.

Analysts said the cables laid bare the thorny, often reluctant relationship between Pakistan and the US, as well as the dangerously fragmented nature of power politics inside the country.

Cyril Almeida, a Dawn columnist, said: "These cables show just how dangerous the transition to democracy is in Pakistan, how powerful the army is, and how much clout outside powers wield.".

Zafar Hilaly, a retired ambassador, said: "We knew so much of this, I was surprised to find myself reacting with surprise. But it is different when you see something in black and white.. It shows what a huge role the Americans play in everything here. In fact, Zardari and Kayani confirm it."

The most dispiriting element of the cables, he added, was that they showed that nine years after the September 11 attacks, "nobody seems to have a plan". "What is the framework, what is the goal?" he asked.

Almeida said he foresaw no long-term impact of the cables except "to lay down a public marker about just how bad relations are between the various players.

"It confirms that, far from being a place where any one player or institution pulls the strings, we have various power centres jockeying for power – with uncertain outcomes."